User talk:Camilo Flores
---- __TOC__ Events... Man, I've heard the news, and I'm very glad to hear that you're alright. Don't worry about your inactivity, it's understandable considering the aftershocks. MC My Computer 15:48, September 17, 2015 (UTC) : Hey Cam, I'm sorry for the recent events in your country, I hope everything is alright with you and your family. AndreEagle17 16:09, September 17, 2015 (UTC) ::Hi Cam. I heard about the earthquake on the news earlier. Glad to hear that you're safe. Don't worry about your "inactivity". Yours and Monk's situations are far more important than activity on here, so take your time. Sam Talk 17:40, September 17, 2015 (UTC) ::I must admit that I forgot about the earthquake in Chile, and that you were Chilean, or I would have sent this message sooner. Earthquakes are likely to catch anyone offguard, and considering the Richter Scale magnitude of the one in Chile, the fact that your family were is hardly a surprise. I hope that you and your family are safe and well, and I wish them all the best. ::TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) 10:04, September 25, 2015 (UTC) ::: Thanks for the support, guys. Yeah, it was stressful and caught us offguard, but, despite this, we managed to stay positive at these events. The rest of my family are fine, and together we sorted out the post-quake stress. Again, thanks. [[User:Camilo Flores|'SWAT Cam F']] 17:14, September 18, 2015 (UTC) Re: Events... You are welcome. I am glad that you and your family are safe and well. I have personally never experienced an earthquake, and I naturally hope that I never will, but I understand the nature of earthquakes, and your country is very fortunate compared to Nepal, which you might remember was hit be a weaker - but much more devastating - earthquake a few months ago, which caused thousands of deaths. TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) 15:40, September 29, 2015 (UTC) RE Thanks for warning Him. Myth(Talk/ ) 15:25, October 2, 2015 (UTC) RE Thank you. Let's hope things will be different after probation :P Myth(Talk/ ) 15:28, October 3, 2015 (UTC) RE: User No problem. It was beginning to annoy me too, especially since it wasn't funny the first time. Hopefully he gets the message now. Sam Talk 23:40, October 7, 2015 (UTC) Crusader Hey, Regarding your Crusader statement; I have (along with Konan in a GTA Online session) thoroughly overlooked the Crusader, every little detail, and I can honestly not see these "red marks" you've seen. I have come to the conclusion that either; you saw "blood trails" from the Crusader, which appeared red on the lining of the jeep...OR the red lines aren't present in the Xbox One/PS4/PC version... So I'm not sure. I'll keep it removed for now, when I get on the Xbox 360 I can confirm my latter conclusion. Tar! :) • • 16:42, October 11, 2015 (UTC) Hello Camilo. As Monk has already pointed out, we have looked over the details of the Crusader throughly, and we cannot locate any red marks on the rear doors of the vehicle. However, it may be possible that we misunderstood your statement, so could you please try again to explain what you saw to me? TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) 17:19, October 11, 2015 (UTC) GTE Holas, Te pille, Camilo. Saludos de parte GTE Fabrix199 (talk) 15:21, October 12, 2015 (UTC) Molestation Yes it is a word. It means "to make annoying sexual advances to; especially : to force physical and sexual contact on". So basically, it means to molest or basically rape someone. How much fun Rockstar must have when making names of businesses. LS11sVaultBoy (Talk) 18:52, October 16, 2015 (UTC) *Thanks for letting me clear about this. I though by the word that it means annoying to someone. My bad. [[User:Camilo Flores|'SWAT Cam F']] 18:58, October 16, 2015 (UTC) : Hello Camilo, I just wish to inform you that the word "molestation" can actually mean "to annoy", as the Latin root of the word (molestāre) means just that. However, the word is generally taken to refer to sexual molestation in contemporary English, in the same way that "intercourse" is generally taken to mean sexual intercourse, even though it can refer to any two-way exchange (such as these messages). : TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) 12:20, October 27, 2015 (UTC) Re: Buzzard Image Hecho ;) DocVinewood (talk) 16:30, October 18, 2015 (UTC) Request for Promotion Good day, I have made a request for promotion to the position of Patroller. I have left this message to all GTA Wiki Staff and posted a copy of my application below for convenience. Please note that the timestamp on this message is current at the time of posting this message, not at the time of posting the Request for Promotion. P.S.: I apologize if you have already responded on the Requests for Promotion page; this message was sent to all members of the GTA Wiki Staff, regardless of if they have already voted. TAlim 1994 - Patroller (re-application) Good day, I wish to re-apply for the position of Patroller. My reasons remain the same as my last application, and I only wish to add two other notes: firstly, as per the advice of other Staff members, I have attempted to take a more active role as a policy enforcer since my last application, and I have issued several Image Policy reminders to the appropriate users; secondly, I have now (at the time of writing this message) made 1,097 edits on this wiki (including the creation of one new page), approximately double the number of edits made since my previous application. TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) 12:28, October 27, 2015 (UTC) Regarding your Request for Promotion comment Hello Camilo, could you please clarify what you meant by your comment on my Request for Promotion, in particular with my "still having problems to 'trust on you'"? No offense, but your comment was extremely badly worded, and I could hardly understand it. However, since I assume that English is not your first language, I can excuse your problems with grammar. TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) 07:12, October 28, 2015 (UTC) Good to know. Do not worry, I have no hard feelings towards you. TAlim 1994 - Konan T-A Lim (talk | ) RE: User He's been blocked for a week. Sam Talk 18:07, October 28, 2015 (UTC) Chat Hey man!! Get on chat as soon as you can! I have some great news :D • • 09:20, October 29, 2015 (UTC) Re. Warning I'm not here to complain about my warning. That's fine. I'm just here to explain my position. I know not all moderators are useless like Lsvaultboy, who actually removed the clearly obvious fan art on the Amy Scheckenhausen page when andreeagle vehmently defended it. But for the most part, that and other incidents, including those other GTA fans shared about them in an essay I wrote about the site on a forum, has left a sour taste in my mouth. Even though a bad attitude is never good in the long run, it shouldn't be used as an excuse to ignore a legitimate problem someone brought up. I would love to search proofs, which I more often than not do, but when I try to change the misinformation to actual information, it always gets reverted back by one of the higher ups being useless. If you want to get mad and say that I have a bad attitude saying that, I don't care. But again, just because someone has a bad attitude or is frustrated about something that's been passed off as fact for so long, that shouldn't be an excuse to ignore it and sweep it under the rug, which I feel is now starting to become a defense on why matters are being ignored - Universetwisters (talk) 17:21, October 30, 2015 (UTC) Re. Re 1. Yes, Vaultboy helped out removing the picture which I thanked him for, but on the other hand, Andre kept reverting my removal of the clearly fan-produced picture and when I pointed out it wasn't listed on any other Rockstar site, his only response was "Yeah, GTA Advance isn't in Rockstar's website either.", which to me felt unprofessional. As I said before, actions like that coming from an admin really give a lot of people a poor impression on how the site is run. 2. As mentioned before, I stated why the picture had to be removed, that it was unofficial, and even then, it was blatantly ignored by Andre. Many other folks had this experience as well, as I mentioned in my past message. 3. I've been told it many times and the bulk of the time is voicing my distaste as to how a piece of fanon or clearly misinformed piece of information was up for so long. I know, uncivil yadda yadda makes it hard to trust, etc. but again, that shouldn't be an excuse to ignore a legitimate concern or issue, which I feel is being thrown around more and more. Even if I were to civily bring up an issue, it would probably be shot down by YOU WERE UNCIVIL WE DON'T KNOW IF ITS ACCURATE OR NOT, which you guys should since you're running a GTA site. - Universetwisters (talk) 19:20, October 30, 2015 (UTC) : There's a great difference between "This image posted in the article isn't official as I can't find it in the Rockstar website, but it is here for years. It should be removed" and "Staff in this wiki is unprofessional, poor-acknowledged and only focus in fanfictions." : As much as a user may be right, they must be civil, which in this case he isn't, ever. AndreEagle17 19:32, October 30, 2015 (UTC) : ::I specifically said that the picture was't official and again, your only response to that was sarcastically claiming that GTA Advance wasn't official just because it wasn't listed on Rockstar's site (which it is as a matter of fact but that's besides the point). You never challenged my points, you simply reverted my edits despite the facts I was bringing up and then you locked the page because you wanted to keep the fanon up until vaultboy got rid of it. Of course, I don't know if that's the actual reason since you never said that. I only came to the assumption that "staff in this wiki is unprofessional" because of how you handeled that. Maybe if you actually looked into the facts I brought up and considered them, much like I would consider any facts you would bring up other than a sarcastic remark. Hopefully I don't get another warning for pointing out a criticism in how the place is run, but hell, I'd like to challenge that Andre's handling in the pictures on that page was uncivil aswell. - Universetwisters (talk) 20:42, October 30, 2015 (UTC) You criticize this place too much UT, if you think this is a fanon site, then why do you still edit here? And your "points" brought up in discussions are always offensive, if you want to say that something is unofficial, then just say "it is unofficial, it doesn't appear in Rockstar's official website" rather than saying that this wiki is all fanon and all that stuff. And it's not just me who is against you, as far as I can see, many people argued with you before, including other staff members; I helped you with the Deep Inside (movie) by deleting it since it wasn't relevant but you still have no respect for staff and your tone is still very offensive to them. And don't worry, you're not gonna receive a warning next time; I got something better. AndreEagle17 20:52, October 30, 2015 (UTC) :I wouldn't be so critical of the place if there was more quality control on what gets in and what doesn't, if sources are properly cited instead of being added and assumed to be true without a second thought. And that's exactly I did on Amy's talk page, I said it was unofficial and it didn't appear on any Rockstar's sites, only for you to blatantly ignore it and lock it for reasons you still refuse to explain. I'm not denying you didn't help me get rid with Deep Inside, but what made Amy's fanon picture any more relevant than a fanon movie? I'm not one to go "even though he isn't making a valid point, I'm going to let him get away with keeping a clearly fake picture up because he got rid of a fake article". Either you get rid of all the fake things or you keep all the fake things up, that's the point I'm making - Universetwisters (talk) 21:11, October 30, 2015 (UTC) :: So you're almost saying that this wiki is full of shit because of that single picture? And what part of "Your behavior makes everyone go against you" don't you understand? I said that a hundred times and you still say the same thing! AndreEagle17 21:20, October 30, 2015 (UTC) :: :::I only used the picture as an example of how pompus some of the moderators and such can be. You're given evidence that challenged your claim and you ignore it to enforce whatever unexplained reason why you want a clearly fake picture up. That speaks as much volume to me and fellow critics on the forums about vain of some of the moderators are, as how my uncivility "makes everyone go against me". The only reason I'm repeating myself is because you keep failing to address not only why you thought an obviously unofficial picture should stay up, but also how myself and others can constructively criticize and suggest ways to get rid of fanon without moderators coming up in arms against us. - Universetwisters (talk) 21:31, October 30, 2015 (UTC) :LOOK. You're provoking Andre now. STOP. You're attitude is disgraceful and you can't admit you're in the wrong. Because of that, I'm recommending a block for you. Probably a permanent one. Give it a rest, stop criticising, and most of all, do not come here to complain about what the wiki is like and how we deal with things. You either learn, or leave. • • 21:42, October 30, 2015 (UTC) :I know I'm in the wrong. I've said in the past that I've been rude and that I can aknowledge, but what I can't understand is why he kept what was clearly a fake picture up. That's literally all I want to know and I'll be more than welcome to leave and go find a better place if I'm given a legitimate reason behind that action. - Universetwisters (talk) 21:47, October 30, 2015 (UTC) Why is this being promoted on your userpage? Remove it. How dare you think you can come here, give an attitude like you did, promote the wiki as a piece of shit, then think you can stay? • • 21:56, October 30, 2015 (UTC) : Relax Monk, this guy is now going to cry on that page saying that our information is misleading, that we are all 9 years old and that he is the only one who knows what is right in the GTA series, hahaha. AndreEagle17 22:01, October 30, 2015 (UTC) ::He doesn't have to remove anything Monk, his criticism about the Wikia is legit, so now people can only contribute to the wikia if they think that this place is fine and dandy? He does have a point when he says that Andre did not give a legitimate reason to ignore his complains and just block that page, Universe was indeed rude, but Andre could have handled the situation a bit better, especially when his argument about GTA Advance not being on any official Rockstar website was actually false. [[User:558050|'DLVIII']] Talk 22:10, October 30, 2015 (UTC) I have watched from the sidelines again and am going to add my two-penneth. Yet again, this has been blown out of all proportion. Yes, UT can be rude and in-your-face, but he does raise some valid points. There is a lot of information on here that has come about through rumour, heresy and downright speculation. I've been reading his post on the GTA Forum and one of his main complaints is that the staff can be quite blunt and quick to act when challenged, and not always in a good way. He probably was heading for a block at some point (not just recently but in March when Sean had an issue with him over a police car, and his overall attitude has struck me as mildly belligerent) but I think six months is too much for a first time offence. What I propose is that he is unblocked and we all hold clear-the-air talks, probably on neutral ground like the Community Noticeboard. That way we can all raise our issues with each other and hopefully come to a sensible conclusion rather than a battle on a personal talk page. No-one has come out of this with any glory, but I think if we can all at least tolerate each other and we come to some sort of middle ground he will be a useful editor. This will probably go down like a lead balloon, but what do you think? Sam Talk 22:27, October 30, 2015 (UTC) ^Voting for an unblock as well. Let's discuss this properly. 22:32, October 30, 2015 (UTC) ::As I already said to Leon, I reduced his block to 1 month, not just because this is his first time being blocked, but also because I think Andre was far too quickly on blocking the page and ignoring UT, with did not make the discussion any easier. I do think he still deserves some block time for being rude despite Andre's behaviour. But if the majority of the staff agrees to unblock him, I don't have any problem with that. [[User:558050|'DLVIII']] Talk 22:35, October 30, 2015 (UTC) :::I believe his block is justified, as I feel it was coming sooner or later, but I agree that the six months was too much for a first block. I've spoken to RandomGTAGamer about the proposal, and if/when UT does come back I think it would be better to air our grievances with each other, rather than slagging the other party off in private. Transparency is the best way forward. Tom and Jamal have largely stayed out of the disputes with UT, so I think if there is a discussion about it they'd be the best bets for neutral parties. Sam Talk 22:42, October 30, 2015 (UTC) Chat Hey man can you get in chat? • • 00:01, November 1, 2015 (UTC)